If boxers can get good money and fight a style that takes the least damage

[Porter's Dad]

Larry will now finally emerge, using the reasoning given by other posters

[The Big Dunn]

Why are you qualifying it when Larry didn't?

And GGG has reached that point in his career. So Larry should be fine with him taking ****, easy fights to preserve his health and money.

You asked for someone to explain so I tried and you come at me.

I think you are making valid points.

[IronDanHamza]

Does anyone know why Larry won't answer my question?

It's simple. I am just saying that to fit in with the central premise of this thread, Larry doesn't mind Golovkin fighting the likes of Monroe, Wade, or another welterweight anymore.

Because **** what the fans want. Make your money, keep your healthy, **** everything else. Best way GGG does that is with easy opponents.

Right, Larry?

Because it's a ****** question.

Larry hasn't talked about level of opposition once. Clearly he is talking about style of fighting.

[New England]

Why in the hell would they take risks in fights that may get them hurt to please people who wont give a damn about them should they take great damage? win, get your money and stay healthy..**** everything else

like golovkin, a small middleweight, being asked to take short money to fight 168 lbers and hope for andre ward to allow him to move up to 175 lbs, taking a bigger risk against a much bigger guy?

[-PBP-]

Why are you qualifying it when Larry didn't?

And GGG has reached that point in his career. So Larry should be fine with him taking ****, easy fights to preserve his health and money.

Off topic, but Willie Monroe has been sharp lately. That may turn out to be a decent win in hindsight.

But fighting the best gets you the good money. If you can win decisively and are defensively responsible you can continue to get big money fights and extend your career longer. I love the Gatti/Ward's as much as anyone but those types of fighters have short term sparks, get recycled over and over again and are eventually replaced with new rock em sock em robots.

[Porter's Dad]

Because it's a ****** question.

Larry hasn't talked about level of opposition once. Clearly he is talking about style of fighting.

Oh, the question is ****** but the thread premise isn't? One that Larry conjured up because someone in another thread probably criticised boring fighters?

The premise of Larry's thread is for fighters to disregard fans wishes and avoid damage, make money and **** everything.

But the easiest way to do that is by taking easy fights.

But wait. No. People are gonna qualify this on Larry's behalf. He's talking about fighters fighting smart in tough fights, even though he didn't say that. He just wants fighters to look out for their own best interests.

But their own best interests would be taking easy paydays against soft opposition. But no wait, Larry wasn't saying that. He wants fighters to fight the best but fight cautious, because fans don't care about them. Right. OK. But talking tough fights are risky for fighters, and fighters shouldn't do that because as Larry says, fighters won't care about them post-retirement. Money, health, **** everything else.

[GhostofDempsey]

I didn't mention a single word about Floyd, and off you go.

Youre a fan of some fighters and hate others because they not to your personal liking, what is a well rounded fighter, that's as wishy washy as saying people want a car with four wheels and a engine.

Like I said fans are on the outside of the game being spoon fed dumb rock information so they can jump up an down because its a different opinion. people on the inside see through most of it fans don't they thrive on it.

Look at this forum its all hate and ass kissing, my guy is always the best so that means yours is rubbish so I will search high and low out for any negative I can find and present it up to show Im right, thats fan logic.

We don't all drive the same car or wear the same clothes just because something doesn't appeal to you doesn't makes yours better and the other guys worse.

The aim of the fight game for every fighter is to win, there are many ways to win and many styles that will win when used correctly against another styles, they are all trying to do the same thing and that is go as far as they can, and they all individuals.

Once you understand that you can actually appreciate the science aspect of boxing, the execution of that science is what I enjoy there is so much more to boxing than just power but you got to be able to see it before you can appreciate fully what is going on and what it takes to achieve., who gives a **** about personality's fans do.

You want to debate fan bs, you talk about well rounded well what is that exactly, better still why don't you show me by definition and take Floyd seeing you were hell bent on bringing him into it, so take Floyd and break him down into , foot work, hand eye coordination, timing, ring IQ, defense, power, endurance and then tell me whats not well rounded about Floyd.

The thing is youre on about excitement and what you like, youre not seeing any of the scientific side of the sport or the business side of the sport, where everybody that's inside boxing have it under the microscope because its all intertwined into the winning.

There is not a single fighter I dislike I look at the boxing in the ring that's the only part Im interested in and I look at it lot deeper than you do, you are about the hype and gossip I couldn't care less about any of that crap.

You bring the scientific aspect of the sport into the equation, but your definition of science is defensive minded fighters who hit and don't get hit, which is fine. I can appreciate a defensive fighter like Whitaker who stood in front of opponents and made them miss from arms reach. No clinching, no running, no dirty tactics--none of which are scientific. I bring Floyd into the mix because he is the most often talked about and he of course is the person that Larry was eluding to in his opening thread, let's not kid ourselves, ok.

Fact is, of the two P4P lists (Ring and ESPN) there are only two defensive fighters on those lists--Ward and Rigo. Why Rigo is on there is beyond me, he isn't active enough despite his skills. Ward is understandable, but ranked way too high for someone whose only top tier opponent in the last five years was Kovalev.

There are many fighters who are well-rounded and possess defensive and offensive skills that are far more entertaining. And before we dismiss the casuals of the sport, they are the ones that determine a fighter's success to a large degree. In today's business climate, they are the ones who will need to buy the PPVs. Floyd was smart enough to capitalize on that by his arrogance and appealing to a certain demographic as a "role model" and giving a voice to those who emulate him and share his values or lack thereof. He is as much as tabloid sensation as he is a boxer.

[Porter's Dad]

like golovkin, a small middleweight, being asked to take short money to fight 168 lbers and hope for andre ward to allow him to move up to 175 lbs, taking a bigger risk against a much bigger guy?

Larry will not answer this. He will ignore it until others give him the right answer

Basically, what Larry thinks is OK is performances like Lara against Canelo because Lara has to think about his family, his health and **** everything else.

But a basic fighter like Golovkin should move up and seek greatness, as Larry often tells us. You know, take physical risks, for no discernible financial mark-up from what he is making now. Apparently it's a style thing only that Larry is talking about. There is no risk in moving up in weight classes against bigger, stronger fighters (even though you can make your weight division easily).

[boxinghead530]

Why in the hell would they take risks in fights that may get them hurt to please people who wont give a damn about them should they take great damage? win, get your money and stay healthy..**** everything else

And how many fighters does this apply to? Who are the boring fighters that are making good money at this time?

[brettWall]

Very contradictory thread from a member of the anti-GGG federation of fanboys. So, in essence they're now saying GGG shouldn't give a **** about these fanboys telling him to move up and fight the #1 p4p. Oh well... Another mind-boggling thing for normal fans like me is why do these clowns who claim to be fans of the sport hate entertaining fighters, but love boring ones? We all know that if boxers are all of the Lara, Rigo, Mayweather types this sport would be dead. This site would probably be non-existent in the first place. I saw fights like SRL vs Hearns, etc., when I was a young kid, and those what attracted me to the sport.